Latest

I hope you have had a chance to look at the video. Incredibly intriguing discussion. Both Richard Rohr and Brian Ammons are gifted speakers. Lots of psychology in there had a hard time following all of it since I have not read much Freud, but very intriguing. I want to pick up on a couple of things that Brian mentioned especially his notion of Sacred Sex. You can read his full account on his blog here. I may be pushing Brian’s words here, but to me sacred sex involves some understanding of sacrament. If this is the case then sex is actually a means by which God’s grace manifests itself to an individual, a couple, and I think ultimately to the community at large. By placing sex in the category of sacrament it eliminates much of the church’s discussion (and sometimes hatred) of sex as just bodily pleasure. If sex is sacramental then it actually provides a way for which divine can be interacted with and related then to other people. Sex then becomes a means by which grace and love can be shown. In saying this though I want to be careful. I am not endorsing a free love let’s just go out and have sex with everyone. I am not a hippie (or at least not in this issue). This sacred sex is found within the confines of the church body and the Christian community as a whole. In saying this I think that sex is a commitment between two people engaged in practicing sacred sex with each other. Commitment is a key part of sacred sex. Continuing on, Adrian Thatcher offers,

“The love which is the uniting bond of the couple, which so to speak has the spiritual, emotional and physical resources of each partner behind it, contains a dynamic which reaches beyond the couple in its drive to share itself more widely. When directed outwards, their love can become a creative, healing power throughout the couple’s social and personal world. A marriage which is brought to the incarnate triune God for consecration will be one where divine love, incarnated in the particular couple, becomes source of enrichment in the lives and loves of others” (Taken from Liberating Sex, 89)

Thatcher offers up the idea that a couple (marriage here I think needs to include all sexualities and genders) embodies God’s grace and love that can be directed towards others. To me then this makes sex not only a holy invention for which we are to enjoy, but a means by which the sacramental grace of God can manifest itself not only to the couple, but to others especially the church community.

Ultimately I want to echo Brian’s comments that the church’s conversation of sexuality needs to change from a discussion of legality towards the understanding of sexual practice how to make this activity sacred and even perhaps sacramental. There will be more posts I am sure about this subject but this is my initial response.Check out Brian’s blog Nekkid Resurrection and Richard Rohr here. Also check out Homebrewed Christianity for more interesting topics.

Like this:

I have always wondered about how the church approached sexuality. Even as a teenager it seemed to me that the church was conflicted on the issue. Yes in marriage, NO!!! everyone else. So is sex a good thing? Yes, but only in marriage if not in the confides of marriage it is totally destructive and the unforgivable sin. It will destroy your life. HUH? To say the church has struggled over sexuality is to kind of point out the obvious. I wanted to post on sexuality, but was not sure on how to do it. I think there has been plenty of finger-pointing and discussion of why the church views sexuality in a harsh way, but no real way to move forward from those criticisms. This video with Brian Ammons & Richard Rohr is perhaps the beginning of a new discussion of sexuality. Watch the video and see what you think. I will have another blog on my thoughts.

The discussion of how postmodernism and theology is perhaps as fluid and as controversial as the whole movement of Postmodernism itself. This is why of course I wish to talk about it. I am currently in a class discussing the implication of French philosopher Paul Ricœur and his understanding of hermeneutics on the enterprise of theology. Ricoeur famously develops his understanding of the hermeneutic and narrative arc. Without going into too much detail there is basically three different stages of interpretation culminating in a post critical understanding. While this arc is more like a spiral considering interpretation is continuous it is good metaphor for which to understand interpretation. My question comes: Can this post critical understanding be conceived of as ethics and what would this mean for theology and the Christian life? For those of you reading who may be wondering what the heck I am talking about another question might be: How do we have a critical engagement in the world as Christians especially in the realm of ethics? Thoughts and comments welcome.